Exam Question Thoughts

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by griblets

In situations with the clock running and :05 or less remaining in the game, interfering with the ball should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. The clock should be allowed to expire and the game ends with Team B winning 65-63.

9.3.3 SITUATION D: The score is tied 60-60 with four seconds remaining in the game. A1 has a fast break and is near the free-throw line on his/her way to an uncontested lay-up. B5 running down the court near the sideline, intentionally runs out of bounds in the hopes of getting a leaving-the-floor violation called. RULING: B5's intentional violation should be ignored and A1's activity should continue without interruption. COMMENT: Non-contact, away from the ball, illegal defensive violations (i.e. excessively swinging the elbows, leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason) specifically designed to stop the clock near the end of a period or take away a clear advantageous position by the offense should be temporarily ignored. The defensive team should not benefit from the tactic. If time is not a factor, the defense should be penalized with the violation or a technical foul for unsporting behavior. (10-1-8)

[BigCat]

Test tip,
If you see words like “swat” or “strikes” the answer is likely always to be the more severe penalty. They don’t ever want to allow a kid to swat or throw the ball into the stands.
Now, at my age...with clock running out.. I tell the kid who did it to go get the ball. Then I run off the floor. I’m not waiting another 10 minutes for free throws and other nonsense.

Younger guys, call the T and if you see it on a test... The answer will be a T.